Why Ulfric was right to kill the High King

[sajuukkhar9000]

Ulfric made a deal with the Jarl of Markarth, not The Empire as a whole.

[MacSuibhne]

Ulfric made a deal with the Jarl of Markarth, not The Empire as a whole.

 

The High King is a sworn vassal to the Emperor and if the Jarls are not similarly sworn, they are, at minimum, sworn vassals to the High King.

 

More to the point, it was at the insistence of the Thalmor, with the acquiescence/capitulation of the Empire, and the agency of Jarl Igmond and High King Torygg, that the promise was repudiated and Ulfric arrested.

 

Chain of command, train of logic. No matter how you cut it, it was a betrayal and all the more dishonourable for that.

Edited July 7, 2012 by MacSuibhne

[Deleted4666244User]

 

i am not questioning anyone's personal choice, it is just that i personally cannot stand for religious freedom when it runs the risk

 

Yes, you and others have made that point repeatedly.

 

The problem is you can make the same point about any kind of freedom. Until you can retreat no more and have zero freedom.

 

And I've been around these forums (plural) enough to know that these kinds of threads generally start innocently enough (although given the inevitable outcome one has to suspect ulterior motives) and quickly proceed to "don't join the Stormcloaks because Ulfric is a racist (or scumbag, douche-bag...fill in your favorite pejorative)" or "Ulfric only wants to be High King" or "Ulfric murdered Torygg." Etc., ad infinitum ad nauseum.

 

Aside from the fact that implicit in these assertions is a guilt by association that is aimed directly at anyone who perceives the right and the logic and the justice in Ulfric's actions, it is arrogant and disrespectful to expect others to blithely ignore the hidden agenda.

 

But even that might be alright...a basis for mature and respectful conversation...except that they are all emotionally driven charges that cannot be substantiated. And when it is shown that they cannot be substantiated, those making such assertions get even more entrenched and start quibbling about the way things are said rather than what is being said. Some going so far as to reject long accepted commonalities of language.

 

look mac, i have this thing that i side with one side of the CW or the other depending on which side i RP. like my thief characters, they side with the empire for purely business reasons. some characters side with the stormcloaks because i RP them like they knnow the empire is dead with no hope of resurrection. some side with the Empire because they believe that the Empire can be redeemed.

 

i have seen both sides and play my characters to what the RP is for them.

[MacSuibhne]

look mac, i have this thing that i side with one side of the CW or the other depending on which side i RP. like my thief characters, they side with the empire for purely business reasons. some characters side with the stormcloaks because i RP them like they knnow the empire is dead with no hope of resurrection. some side with the Empire because they believe that the Empire can be redeemed.

 

i have seen both sides and play my characters to what the RP is for them.

 

No better reason in the world.

[StayFrosty05]

 

sometimes what someone wants, is not what he needs, so ask yourself this: what is that Skyrim NEEDS; Safety and Security, or Religious freedom?

 

what i am saying is, that Looking at Rikke and Torygg, i see no reason why supporting the empire is bad, as both of them worshiped Talos, and were not turned into the Thalmor. i think Skyrim does not need religious freedom if it reduces non-Nords to basically Second-class citizens.

 

I must volunteer, I have serious reservations about this comment, mang.

I am definitely not for ethnic bigotry nor racism, but to alienate an entire people from their from their own historical homeland so's that a foreign people may inhabit it instead... I simply cannot get on board with that.

 

As a foreigner, I would never presume to waltz into another country and demand things from that government. If that government, for whatever reason, didn't approve of allowing a "subversive, young American element" to live within their borders; hey, that is their prerogative, it is their land and I cannot seek to barge my way in as an unwanted annoyance.

 

I lived in China for a piece and experienced nothing but awesomeness and affection, but I would have never presumed to call for a "regime change" should I have been met with hostility and told to leave. China is for the Chinese... and for me, if I conduct myself properly and in accordance with Chinese law. If I was not down with that, well, I had a country of my own to return to.

 

Your position is that of moral absolutism run amok, that if another country violates my own sense of right and wrong, that I am justified in calling down the righteous thunder (American warplanes/Imperial Legion) to bring them into compliance. I am not a militant moral relativist, so I won't say that "anything goes" in another country even if it is "their custom." Perhaps if Skyrim practiced the cannibalism of Dark Elves, I would be more receptive to calls for Imperial regulation, but as it stands, I hardly think that getting discriminated against in a foreign nation is grounds to send in the Marines. Is it desirable, heck no, but is it their right, as a sovereign and ancient people, to not necessarily embrace me, as a foreigner, with open arms, absolutely.

 

I have great sympathy for the Dark Elves, but fundamentally they are guests in a foreign land, much as I was. It is not as though they are the original inhabitants of Skyrim and the Nords just invaded and started mistreating them one terrible day. Morrowind still exists if they find the situation truly intolerable. Having played Morrowind, I can tell you that Dark Elves were infinitely worse in terms of discrimination than Skryim's Nords could ever hope to be. And they straight up owned slaves, a la the American South. Both sides are at fault for the situation in Windhelm, but ultimately the Dark Elves are guests in the homeland of the Nords. In my eyes, that means that the Nords get the final say in terms of what goes down in their own homeland. That is, until that day that they start cannibalizing the Dark Elves. Then we may revisit this topic and the Empire may invade.

 

 

Okay...I keep thinking the same thing as I read these responses in this thread, I have until now restrained myself from speaking up, but the irony and double standards are really starting to irk me....As an Irish ancestral Australian, my fairly recent (historically) blood line comes from both the invaded and the invader....two exact re-plays of that which I have bolded/underlined, just from opposite perspectives.....Has anyone here at all from America, Australia, New Zealand, Africa, Islands, etc.... (all with very recent invasion histories)...considered these facts in their arguments, or is it all too easy to sit upon high moral horses spouting the rights and wrongs within a fantasy world without considering these same issues within the real world?....Okay, had my say, will shut up now, just wanted to put that thought out there to all.

[djinx187]

More to the point, it was at the insistence of the Thalmor, with the acquiescence/capitulation of the Empire, and the agency of Jarl Igmond and High King Torygg, that the promise was repudiated and Ulfric arrested.

 

I'll just stick to actions that happened and not what people said people thought or apparently books that are written on a one-sided opinion or even include the racism or other personality flaws.

 

Where did you find that info that Torygg was the one who did that? UESP.net? When Ulfric got captured Torygg wasn't High King yet his father was. Talk to Sybille Stentor it pretty much time stamps that he had gotten the throne after the Markath incident since the Thalmor and leaving the Empire was on topic at the moot. If the whole leaving the Empire was not part of the topic of discussion during that moot you wouldn't be able to fit it in to a decent time frame and then you might have a point.

 

Even then Ulfric getting played was his own damn fault in the first place.(again only place I found anything that side the Empire had anything to do with granting free worship in Markarth was UESP. Not ingame) A jarl does not have the authority to trump a peace treaty signed by the Emperor. Jarl Igmond was desperate and went behind the Empire's back. He wanted his land and power back. The Empire could not afford to get back in to a war with the Thalmor so they had to agree to the terms they signed for peace.

 

Now my speculation.

 

Ulfric originally was in the beginning back at Markarth was really for the freedom of worship of Talos but since he got pretty much screwed he started planning to have him become High King and change things. Waiting until Torygg's father to die to duel him was just one step. He needed Torygg to have no heirs and be at least old enough to be able to hold a sword and have time to raise an army(Using the Talos ban as his main platform for recruiting). Challenging Torygg was a win/win for Ulfric. Torygg said no he would have got the Moot involved and had gotten replaced or Torygg would be dead which would result in the same thing. Ulfric knew the only way he would be actually have a shot would be to have an army backing him since the moot is sort of a joke because of the Empire. Him using a shout on Torygg was just icing on the cake. That just showed what kind of power he had and made him more of a legend.(Which also really was good for his reputation and recruiting for the rebellion)

 

I honestly didn't see it as right for him to kill the High King but something does need to be done about the Empire.

[Lachdonin]

Djinx is quite spot on about the timeline. The decision to break the promise to Ulfric was during the reign of Torygg's father, not Torygg himself. Unless you're going to go down the 'Sins of the Father' route, then there is no way to link the decision to Torygg himself. Thus, you cannot place blame for it on him.

 

Second, argueing that the Jarls speak with the authority of the Empire, even without first getting approval from their superiors, is an absurd idea. To draw a rather crude comparison, the Markarth Incedent would be tantamount to the Mayor of New York allowing as many Cubans into the city as would help fight the gang problems there. It may solve the problem, but he still does not have the authority to overrule federal immigration laws.

 

The simple fact is that Igmond acted on his own, then got slapped back into place by his superiors. He had no right or authority to offer what he did. The Chain of Command doesn't work so that the lower levels can make important decisions without first speaking to superiors. A Mayor doesn't get to dissobey federal laws any more than a Seargent gets to override a General.

 

None of which changes the fact, of course, that the whole issue of Talos worship was made worse by Ulfric's little uproar. It's made rather clear that, before the Rebellion, there were no Talos Hunters, the Thalmor had no presence in Skyrim, and everyone kept on worshiping Talos anyway. By standing on his soap-box, Ulfric called attention to the fact that the Empire was not upholding its end of the Concordant, forcing the Thalmor to get involved and for the Empire to crack down. For everything i disslike about Ulfric, he's a smart man, and he must have known this would happen. By forcing the Thalmor to get involved, Ulfric made sure the Empire cracked down on Talos worship in order to prevent another war. The crachdown created dissent throughout Skyrim, which Ulfric then used to form the Stormcloaks and further his obvious ambition for the crown of High King.

 

In terms of actual evidence, UESP cannot be considered a reliable source. It oversimplifies and is subject to a great deal of bias. The only reliable sources are The Imperial Library (which has text versions of every ingame book, as well as some extra-game written material) and actual ingame conversation.

[sajuukkhar9000]

Why cant people use the UESP as a means to link to in-game books?

 

I do agree the actual articles are mostly BS, but the UESP does have all the books the Imperial Lbirary does, and there's no real harming linking to them.

[MacSuibhne]

I'll just stick to actions that happened and not what people said people thought or apparently books that are written on a one-sided opinion or even include the racism or other personality flaws.

 

Where did you find that info that Torygg was the one who did that? When Ulfric got captured Torygg wasn't High King yet his father was.

 

"huh!?"

 

Talk to Sybille Stentor it pretty much time stamps that he had gotten the throne after the Markath incidenta point.

 

This is what happens when you rely on hearsay and speculation...it all merges into one big balloon of fantasy. From the Lore:

 

The Death of Torygg

 

The Thalmor would not allow the Empire to keep this pledge, and eventually, the young High King of Skyrim, Torygg,

acquiesced

to the Imperial demand to eliminate Talos worship. Jarl Igmund stressed that the peace with the Thalmor was more important than the arrangement with Ulfric and the Nord militia. Ulfric was

arrested

, and eventually

brought before the High King in Solitude

.

 

 

Most of the Lore on UESP is derived from the Imperial Library. Often references are given to the books/sources from which they are derived. And while many books are obviously biased and even wildly inaccurate...such as The Bear of Markarth...they are, as a whole a better source of verifiable information than hearsay, gossip, innuendo, biased accounts, and timelines drawn out of thin air.

[Moraelin]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but fanfic doesn't override what's actually in the game. Just because someone on a wiki made up some stuff about that, doesn't mean anything. Point out where it is said in the game, or in official canon materials, or basically who cares?

 

If it's based on sources that are in game or in the official canon, then point out those sources. Otherwise it's just made-up unsupported fan-fic.

 

And I'm seriously getting tired of "lore" being mistaken for "what some anonymous fanboy MADE UP, based on nothing but his delusional imagination" :P

 

Just like you can't write your own back-story details about Luke Skywalker and have it become somehow official Star Wars "lore", it doesn't work that way for TES either. It's that simple. What's official is what's in the canon material, while what dots were connected by some random fan are fully irrelevant.